Is GEP really necessary?
-
2ppaamm:
I hope we can at least agree on that highlighted above.Er... but the original selection process was devised by experts invited by MOE along with training the original set of teachers. Along the way, they couldn't cope with the teaching so they changed the whole selection system. I don't think this is called 'robustized', I'd rather call this 'accustomized', with compromise.
To use vlim's terminology, they used to choose kids with surface area bigger, but any shape. However, since they find it hard to even find the surface area of these children, they decided the biggest they can find, with the criteria of being round, and does not matter if their surface area is smaller than those who are odd shaped and not round. 
In short, GEP has its own definition of giftedness. And it is ok. As long as they don't lead parents of gifted children in all directions and only to find out through their own admission months later.
Then again, if we do, there will be nothing much to talk about here....
-
ksi:
Maybe you should consult 2ppaamm, to her, they are not gifted only HA...so maybe HA run out of steam? or maybe they are gifted children as they are skewed in some subjects, so maybe this results show that they are in fact gifted but skewed? Your expectation is gifted and all rounders, hers is gifted and skewed. So now we understand how the labeling of GEP is made complicated by adults.
They are J2 classes. Those are the latest CT results. Actual class size is 23. You will know where they are from with the tell-tail sign of GEPers failing 2 subjects out of 5 and with just only 4 months to A level. Seasoned parents will not panic and know that everything will be fine in the end. First time parent with A-level kid will be hurting for the bestest tutor for their kid.atutor2001:
[quote=\"ksi\"]
Sorry what class of 20 is this? Intermingling class? Tuition class or secondary class?
At A level, there is no T-score to pull down their grade and they can pick the subject of our choice. So the trend is more accurate. Those are only figures of 2 classes. However, if you hear the same kind of pattern for 3 different cohorts, you can roughly gauge - no statistic needed.
So for the GE kids, damn if they do, damn if they don't. They do well all-rounding, they are at best HA only cos no truly gifted can be all rounding(by 2ppaamm's definition), they don't do well, they are also HA (atutor2011's definition) because gifted kids must be gifted in learning everything. Do you see my point now? When are we going to stop cornering these poor kids?
And with this type of weak argument, we want to call for changes to GEP? Sorry please allow me to laugh....ok I will do it discreetly..
[/quote] 
:rotflmao: I don't have an answer, and don't profess to have one leh, can only speculate if you want me to... :evil: not going to do that here, and don't think it adds value.
All I know is that HA or gifted, they should be given the same opportunities. Hanging so much resources based upon one selection test at P3 does not make sense. There is really very little difference in the way these children grow. In fact, MANY gifted children are late developers too, so depriving them of access is really cruel.
I believe all kids should be given the SAME opportunities by the GOVERNMENT, not home yeah? Whether they are gifted, HA, average or below average. In a society, we must always look after the last 10%, and the average as well. It is not right to sink in the resources to look after only the top, because the top can always look after themselves, just like the rich in every country should always pay more taxes, and not get payouts.
As for being in GEP and they are facing so much expectations. To him much is given, much is expected. That's cruel, but that's the reality in life. As parents, we might find it cruel, but we have to teach them that that's the reality in life. Not sure about other parents, but I teach my kids that all the time. Do not expect differentiated treatment, and nobody owes us a living. If anything, because we are given more, we should have higher expectations of ourselves, and aim to contribute more. Yes, to the point of giving up our own rights sometimes. If someone steals my ideas and publish that, I keep mum, and go on with new research, and consequently, I will find even better things. And, I have been doing this all my life. Is it fair? To some, no. To me, yes! Because if I want to continue to be gifted more, I want to be big enough to be able to be disadvantaged and give. That's life. It is hard to explain, unless you can see it. DS1 came home and told me that he had to do a group project all by himself because his team members would do much to help. I told him to just complete the whole project, and put his teammates' name there. Yes, they took a ride on him. But SO WHAT? I'd like to teach my kids to give more than take, to expect more from himself than others, ultimately, he becomes a better person. That's all I care. There is no fairness in life, because if he is gifted more, and want to continue to be blessed, then he has to give better results. Also, I tell my children that people will always be a look out to find faults in them, and to accept that. This is not unfair and not cruel. This is how the world works. When you are good, people look for faults in you. Just because they are my kids does not change the reality. So, I prepare them for the cruel reality instead. This also explains why many gifted individuals have the <b>Imposter Syndrome</b>, which manifested from such expectations. So, there, it is nothing cruel, this area has been well-researched. And that is why I don't think giving them a label so young is beneficial to GEPpers, especially when so many were hothoused, and the selection criteria is so ill-defined, it sets these GEPpers up for failures. As it is with the system, there is only one way out for the GEPpers, and that is to perform better than the non. The system set that out this way, and yes, it is cruel, but if you look at it from the rest of the 99%, they have been told this is the cream, and therefore they expect the cream to perform.
So in short, yes, I believe the current GEP selection system does not select the gifted, but the high ability, but these are not mutually exclusive. It does not mean ALL high ability are not gifted. That is a wrong assumption. In fact the top 1-2% are mostly high ability, according to years of research by James T. Webb, Edward R. Amend, Nadia E. Webb, Jean Goerss, Paul Beljan, F. Richard Olench. Their findings have been well documented and studied by gifted teachers all over the world. They have also proven that in contrast, the very highly gifted are normally NOT high ability and underperformers, it is the highly gifted that will be left out. So that is not according to 2ppaamm, but by world renowned researchers who are expert in this area, experts not found in Singapore.
Thirdly, if the differentiated program by GEP is not individualized, then of course more than 1% can handle them. Some GEPpers cannot not because they are not gifted enough, but there are so many other factors, including the family background, motivation etc etc. Given the right support, my take is that about the top 25% can handle. Some will not be able to, but some can. The job is to find who can and who cannot along the way. It is not where they are in the percentile, but what kind of support, motivation they can get. But 25% is just a number, I am saying the curriculum can be open up to a much bigger group. And then, for the exceptional learners (notice I didn't say higher gifted), they should have programs to extend their learning capabilities in their pet areas. And, btw, at 9, it is impossible to tell what their areas of expertise are.
And, smaller class size is a must for a change in our education system. This means a much bigger educational budget by the government. How come no body ever does a comparison between what Singapore spent PER CHILD compared to other first world countries? :? I will reserve my findings until another appropriate time.
-
atutor2001:
Thanks for sharing your definition and confirming my understanding of your definition. It differs from 2ppaamm's, she says truly gifted cannot be omni-gifted.
I actually thought that the GEP was targeted at the HA kids and not the truly gifted as there are far too few. Sadly many selected are not even HA but are the products of hot-housing at primary level. Such kids run out of steam. HA kids don't run out of steam but will not do well if the subject is not of interest to them. The results I have shown was refering to A-level, where the kids themselves select the subject of their preference. So we are saying that they could not find 4 subjects that they truly like. I actually think so because they generally, don't like to study.
Truly gifted are all-rounder. I have met many gifted people. While others were busy copying notes, the gifted only sat there, having already understood and stored the information in their own harddisk (brain).
Basic traits of a truly gifted :
a) Speed reading
b) Great ability in understanding and analysis at high speed.
c) Elephant memory with unlimited storage capacity for all subjects
d) Ability to see links and patterns that others don't
Can a truly gifted, who is endowed with such natural talents not do well in exam because they are skewed? Their elephant memory will pull them through easily even if they don't like it.
HA kids usually have (a) and (b) and some also have (d). However, they don't have (c). It is \"elephant memory\" that allows the gifted to process new issues with cross reference to a much bigger data base at high speed and coming up with a solution. A HA kid needs to wake up and start storing all the info to do well. Those that failed to wake up will be lost in the crowd.
Hot-housed kids has only (a). At young age, their (b) appears good as they went through accelerated learning. As years go by, without the other factors, their results will suffer. -
atutor2001:
I actually thought that the GEP was targeted at the HA kids and not the truly gifted as there are far too few. Sadly many selected are not even HA but are the products of hot-housing at primary level.
If you know of someone in particular, please name and shame them. Pls donch group everyone else and kept insisting them been hot-housed. -
ksi:
:? No leh, this is not what I said. I said MOST (not all) are not omni-gifted, most are skewed. But to expect everyone to be gifted in all areas is not right. I agree with the capacity to learn part, but that does not make them gifted in ALL areas. Many GEPpers are poor in sport for example, but Ben Franklin was an excellent athlete. I even gave an example of Leonardo Da Vinci as an omni-gifted person. But honestly, if the world can only see a few omni-gifted people in HISTORY, how come Singapore expects to see 550 a year?
Thanks for sharing your definition and confirming my understanding of your definition. It differs from 2ppaamm's, she says truly gifted cannot be omni-gifted.atutor2001:
I actually thought that the GEP was targeted at the HA kids and not the truly gifted as there are far too few. Sadly many selected are not even HA but are the products of hot-housing at primary level. Such kids run out of steam. HA kids don't run out of steam but will not do well if the subject is not of interest to them. The results I have shown was refering to A-level, where the kids themselves select the subject of their preference. So we are saying that they could not find 4 subjects that they truly like. I actually think so because they generally, don't like to study.
Truly gifted are all-rounder. I have met many gifted people. While others were busy copying notes, the gifted only sat there, having already understood and stored the information in their own harddisk (brain).
Basic traits of a truly gifted :
a) Speed reading
b) Great ability in understanding and analysis at high speed.
c) Elephant memory with unlimited storage capacity for all subjects
d) Ability to see links and patterns that others don't
Can a truly gifted, who is endowed with such natural talents not do well in exam because they are skewed? Their elephant memory will pull them through easily even if they don't like it.
HA kids usually have (a) and (b) and some also have (d). However, they don't have (c). It is \"elephant memory\" that allows the gifted to process new issues with cross reference to a much bigger data base at high speed and coming up with a solution. A HA kid needs to wake up and start storing all the info to do well. Those that failed to wake up will be lost in the crowd.
Hot-housed kids has only (a). At young age, their (b) appears good as they went through accelerated learning. As years go by, without the other factors, their results will suffer.
So, most are generalists lah, the skewed, highly gifted ones are left out. If we can't even agree that giftedness is often skewed, then errr.... :torchme:
BTW, being gifted is not like you are a god or something... hahaha... I know from observing children who are tested (by real psychologists) who are profoundly gifted. And they are just normal children and you can't really tell what's inside them at all.
-
did you not say they wanted them to be administrators…so generalist fit better, ya?
-
Nebbermind:
did you not say they wanted them to be administrators...so generalist fit better, ya?
Ya lor... so gifted or not does not matter ma... guai guai can already... generalist better mah... No gripe about it, just fed up I wasn't told earlier... and had to find out through much pain and research, and with their own admission. -
:goodpost:
atutor2001:
:goodpost:
I don't believe in statistical bluff. We can reduce the percentage of HIV by killing them. We can reduce the % of empty flats by demolishing them. But the official reasons given would be that there is an improvement to the health situation or that the take up rate of empty flats has increased. (just example - no truth at all)ksi:
Where do you get this statistics?
Personal knowledge is best. All my kids when to Sec and JC with GEPers in the school and I have been kaypohing on who and who are the top students. Besides the few top GEPers in each cohort, most fade away.
Yes, many will jump in and claim that GEPers does not equate to good exam results. I always wonder - exam which is relatively easier than GEPers curriculum. How can one be a GEPer and not do well in A level (no T-score to distort the result and they get to select the subject of their choice). Then others will say \"oh, GEPers were not interested in exam that is why they don't do well\". This makes me even more puzzled because I always remember gifted people are good in nearly everything they do though they are better in those things they like. Ordinary people are no match to them even for things they dislike. Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo... are not only good in painting. They are scientist, mathematician, poet.... Ya, another group will claim \"we can't expect our gifted kid to be of that level like these greats.\" Ya definitely not such level, but at least should be able to do well in a simple A level exam.
Lastly, what is better then getting feedback from the students themselves. I have 3 kids and many friends. I may not be a tutor but I know many students. -
Nebbermind:
In every cohort, we will find very nerdy GEPers working very hard 24/7 but produce only average results at A level. These are the ones that I am refering to.
If you know of someone in particular, please name and shame them. Pls donch group everyone else and kept insisting them been hot-housed.
It is not their fault lah. Some are simply born with super kiasu attitude, must do well type of mindset. Some have parents with that mindset and force it upon their kids. It is not a shameful thing. They are doing so because they thought it is good for their kids - though can be harmful.
Just sharing here, hoping that the selection process can be refined so that these groups can be blocked and will not be subjected to unnecessary pressure and suffering under the programme. -
ksi:
Aiyo...how come suddenly I feel so \"naked\"? :oops:
Yes, Yes, Dr ksi.. We know your ''TOP-less'' talent.. And we LOVE it...firefly38:
[quote=\"ksi\"]
This is what people cannot understand and it has been explained... it seems that people are so caught up in being top that everything is only measured by TOP. If TOP-less, then no GEP calibre.
btw, congrats osim, 90%+ is great all-rounder for GEP, even for mainstream is great. :salute:
[/quote] :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login
Online Users
Recent Topics
Statistics